Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38189177›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics2024

Deep learning to estimate gestational age from fly-to cineloop videos: A novel approach to ultrasound quality control.

Ambika V Viswanathan, Teeranan Pokaprakarn, Margaret P Kasaro, Hina R Shah, Juan C Prieto, Chiraz Benabdelkader, Yuri V Sebastião, Ntazana Sindano, Elizabeth Stringer, Jeffrey S A Stringer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Real-time gestational-age estimation at 11-13 weeks using artificial intelligence on non-targeted ultrasound sweeps.Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2026
    Observational
  2. Article
  3. Emerging applications of artificial intelligence for obstetric ultrasound: A scoping review.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026
    Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Ambika V ViswanathanDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-6295-0207
Teeranan PokaprakarnDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7548-8539
Margaret P KasaroDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7285-998X
Hina R ShahDepartment of Psychiatry, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7050-5205
Juan C PrietoDepartment of Psychiatry, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3778-9098
Chiraz BenabdelkaderDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Yuri V SebastiãoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4268-3095
Ntazana SindanoUNC Global Projects - Zambia LLC, Lusaka, Zambia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8494-4735
Elizabeth StringerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4210-381X
Jeffrey S A StringerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9590-7216

Funding

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation INV003266Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation OPP1191684
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveLow-cost devices have made obstetric sonography possible in settings where it was previously unfeasible, but ensuring quality and consistency at scale remains a challenge. In the present study, we sought to create a tool to reduce substandard fetal biometry measurement while minimizing care disruption.

methodsWe developed a deep learning artificial intelligence (AI) model to estimate gestational age (GA) in the second and third trimester from fly-to cineloops-brief videos acquired during routine ultrasound biometry-and evaluated its performance in comparison to expert sonographer measurement. We then introduced random error into fetal biometry measurements and analyzed the ability of the AI model to flag grossly inaccurate measurements such as those that might be obtained by a novice.

resultsThe mean absolute error (MAE) of our model (±standard error) was 3.87 ± 0.07 days, compared to 4.80 ± 0.10 days for expert biometry (difference -0.92 days; 95% CI: -1.10 to -0.76). Based on simulated novice biometry with average absolute error of 7.5%, our model reliably detected cases where novice biometry differed from expert biometry by 10 days or more, with an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.93 (95% CI: 0.92, 0.95), sensitivity of 81.0% (95% CI: 77.9, 83.8), and specificity of 89.9% (95% CI: 88.1, 91.5). These results held across a range of sensitivity analyses, including where the model was provided suboptimal truncated fly-to cineloops.

conclusionsOur AI model estimated GA more accurately than expert biometry. Because fly-to cineloop videos can be obtained without any change to sonographer workflow, the model represents a no-cost guardrail that could be incorporated into both low-cost and commercial ultrasound devices to prevent reporting of most gross GA estimation errors.

Indexed as

Deep LearningGestational AgeUltrasonography, PrenatalBiometryFemaleHumansPregnancyPregnancy Trimester, SecondPregnancy Trimester, ThirdQuality ControlVideo Recordingartificial intelligencebiometrydeep learninggestational agequality controlultrasound

Identifiers

PMID38189177
PMCPMC11214162

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.